Clarification on rules and moderation

[Nullify]

@DANDAN_THE_DANDAN Recently, there is a loophole regarding rule 3.2.7 and rule 5.1.5-5.1.6. Basically, one could insult/provoke someone using credit pages and Mangadex won't remove them. The insulted will try to confront them, but instead mods will warn the insulted for derailing off chapter discussion and such.

It appears that rule 3.2.7 intends to respect the translating groups and rule 5.1.5-5.1.6 seems to want to deescalate any possible future blowouts. For the most part, these rules have worked pretty well. However, these rules combined forms the loophole of indirectly encouraging provocation through credit pages censoring the targeted. The same issue that rules 5.1.5-5.1.6 seems to want to prevent is being allowed by this loophole.

There may be a lot of other loopholes/events but this recent one was the one I took time to look into.

 

[Hounder]

@Nomeno There has to be a limit as to what is allowed. As noted, the removal involved something about the New Zealand shooting., a mass murder. In no way could that be considered arbitrary. There are some things that just go too far, regardless of how you want to spin it.

@Nullify Actually, you pretty much hit on the point I was hoping to make earlier, and now I think I can explain on it better.

Basically, a scanlator group is posting up a manga. Anything that is obviously not associated directly with credits/manga content could be considered just like a comment section, and I would moderate it as such. BUT, to be fair, I would only take any moderation action if the party that was "attacked" filed a complaint. If they don't care what was said, then I would move on. If they felt it was something truly offense, then let the moderators read it, and decide if action is needed. There will be spats, just a matter of when someone needs to step in and stop it. I would use basic common sense and apply the same rules that are being applied to the comments/forums.

 

[Nullify]

@Chabry3 Not a mangadex staff, but I think this is a manga reader site made by web developers for scanlators.

In the last post, https://mangadex.org/thread/89114 it states:

But @Holo was more ambitious than we took him for. His dream has been to prove that a manga reader *can* be successful by not allowing ads, respecting scanlator wishes, and refusing to allow official translations to be hosted.

Also there isn't favoritism for big over small groups. Sure, they allowed Merakis to pull off all their chapters or allowed Jaimini's Box to put some extra long delays. But I also witnessed a moderator complying to request of taking off some chapters for a relatively unknown translator under an hour it was posted (https://mangadex.org/title/31942/kono-yuusha-ga-ore-tueee-kuse-ni-shinchou-sugiru there was 3 chapters posted but removed quickly after).

Also just like what they said in their announcement, they do prioritize the scanlators more than the readers. Even if readers demand for chapters to be reuploaded Mangadex still respects the scanlators and keep them off. Personally, I think that is a very respectable quality of Mangadex.

 

[Azure2290]

Honestly I think credit pages need heavy moderation, for example Rapeman Scans and their really shitty political memes and suicide stuff. We're not here for X politicals figures face plastered all over.

 

[Absum]

I only vaguely know of any recent drama and I don't much care about fights between groups.

Last I read the rules they were fine, though I would have liked stronger enforcement. Might already have changed by now though, not like I've read much comments lately and I definitely aren't gonna check if old shitlord comments are still there.

 

[episode]

I voted. #MakeMDGreatAgain
Im joking and im sorry.

 

[Teasday]

_{@Chabry3 posted:}

Is this a site by scanlators and for scanlators, or a site by scanlators and for readers?

From my perspective, we're doing the best we can to satisfy both as well and as far as we know how, because both are intrinsically linked. Without readers, we have no scanlators. Without scanlators, we have no readers.

Technically, I suppose we could have readers without scanlators, which is what the rest of aggregators are doing. However, to me our point as a platform is not only to create a place for scanlators to post their work and reach the widest audience they can, but more importantly to encourage and motivate both them and future scanlators to do so, which is the exact opposite of what ignoring scanlators leads to.

To me it's understandable that some readers get frustrated with us removing chapters at scanlators' request and not allowing official rips, and equally understandable that some scanlators are furious with us allowing expired licenses and some with us unlocking groups that have been inactive for 8 months. The struggle comes from finding the right balance to facilitate the growth of active readership and scanlation alike.

 

[GerryCerryBery]

The thing I most often see, that generates drama is not the sniping or the conduct of certain trolls, but the thing about being impartial not being impartial anymore.

We have certain members on this site, who get called out for their conduct on a regular bases. But and this is a big BUT, even when they are adhering to the rules and are not trolling and someone tries to bait them, while treading the thin line of not-trolling-yet-trolling, the moderators still treat those members like they are trolling, just based on past conduct. Even when the other baiting party is clearly and I mean very clearly trying to rile these certain members up, they get overlooked, because there were past offenses.

What I want to say is, try to be impartial even if there are past offenses. I know it can be hard, because some trolls are really good at pushing buttons and create a lot of work for moderators, but even those trolls have times, when they just want to discuss certain things about a chapter and are not derailing the thread/discussion.

EDIT: I'd like to see the poll more detailed. I'd vote the first option, but I don't want stricter moderation, only the rules to be clearly defined without (too much) loopholes.

 

[Comic]

I can't say I find any issues in comments in the few times I read comments, but I have definitely seen some racist stuff in extra/credit pages that really put me off. I guess if it becomes a problem I'll just have to stop using mangadex if there's no intent to moderate that kind of thing.

 

[BoringTea]

As a reader I have yet to encounter any kind of problem other than groups taking chapters away due to drama. I also decided to not vote as I'm not looking at the rules from a group/scanlator perspective since I believe it's them whose voice is needed.

 

[traveling_chef]

@teasday posted:
"From my perspective, we're doing the best we can to satisfy both as well and as far as we know how, because both are intrinsically linked. Without readers, we have no scanlators. Without scanlators, we have no readers.

Technically, I suppose we could have readers without scanlators, which is what the rest of aggregators are doing. However, to me our point as a platform is not only to create a place for scanlators to post their work and reach the widest audience they can, but more importantly to encourage and motivate both them and future scanlators to do so, which is the exact opposite of what ignoring scanlators leads to.

To me it's understandable that some readers get frustrated with us removing chapters at scanlators' request and not allowing official rips, and equally understandable that some scanlators are furious with us allowing expired licenses and some with us unlocking groups that have been inactive for 8 months. The struggle comes from finding the right balance to facilitate the growth of active readership and scanlation alike."

I've been wondering this since finding out about all the removals and such, just like there are chapters that are delayed but have a link to the original scanlators website, why not do the same for the scanalators who want their work pulled? show us, readers, the chapters exist but are not hosted here and" here's a nice link to go read them on thier site". wouldn't that show respect to the scanners by not straight up hosting their work and allow us readers to know whats up and where we can go to read them?

as a casual reader I haven no idea about the scanlator drama until I go check a manga and find all the chapters missing, how am I supposed to know who the previous scanner was? how am I supposed to know how to read those chapters?

would it be so hard for a place holder sending the readers in the right direction without outright hosting the work of people who don't wish it to be on mangadex? you'd be respecting their wishes while also letting the readers know what's up.

 

[Ovdose]

We will not censor a release in any way unless the release is clearly a troll or contains something egregiously offensive. To this date, we have only removed *one* credit page because it contained a highly offensive reference to the New Zealand shooting.

I know that making jokes about mass shootings is in bad taste and the people getting offended over them aren't in the wrong but I just want to say I personally found that credit page joke funny (Himenospia chapter 8 if anyone is interested) and was surprised to see the chapter being deleted.

Just wanted to tell you how bad taste I have, have a nice day. Even if I sometimes disagree a bit I still think MD moderators are doing a really good job so far.

 

[Plykiya]

@traveling_chef

We have MangaUpdates links on all manga entries if possible. They contain all info on the previous scanlators and the release history of the series. They also show whether or not a series is officially licensed.

 

[Fri]

Making rules tighter are always pointless. Basic rules are always good and fine but no matter how tight a law is, someone interested will always find a way to miss the point or play with it. And moderators aren't and shouldn't be lawful neutral judgement machines, because it's impossible and pointless and only naive nerds ever thought its possible. They should be human arbiter who decide with human mind about human relationships and human decency. For good or worse, it's impossible to please everyone, and everyone should be prepared for that.

 

[traveling_chef]

@Plykiya true but what would be the harm in simply telling the readers the scanlators wanted the chapters to be removed and we can simply go read them at thier site.

quite a few manga that I was reading I didn't find out until sometime later they had been removed because the scanner wanted it that way and that was only because I was reading the comments to find out wth happened and another commenter had already said as much.

 

[Teasday]

@traveling_chef That is a subject that staff members have already discussed at length. There are circumstances we have to consider that make the issue not quite as straightforward as you suggest, but we are looking for (and are already taking steps towards) a satisfying solution.

Can't really make promises, though.

 

[Volphied]

5.1.3 Religious Discrimination: All members of all religions are equally deserving of respect. Insulting someone solely on the basis of their religion or slandering a specific religion is not acceptable on MangaDex. This extends to profile biographies, usernames, and user avatars.

Honestly, it boggles the mind that this rule only applies to comments, and nothing else. You then get things like the banner for https://mangadex.org/group/303/rapeman-scans that get away with bigotry thanks to a ridiculous loophole.

If its wrong to post comments with such content, then the same rule should also apply to usernames, credit pages and scanlation group banner pics.

 

[traveling_chef]

@teasday ah well if it already been discussed internally then just ignore me~

it's hard to know this kind of thing when you're just casually reading manga.


edit: and I would like to say I'm not disagreeing with anything in the rules I was just wondering and wanted to throw in my 2 cents

 

[Kayyou]

Not related to the recent drama (that I was not aware of) but regarding blurriness of the general rules:

While I've been really happy with the platform itself and the community as a whole, I feel like the "Disagreement" rules are pretty blurry on harassment techniques such as dog-piling. The "as long as you provide an argument for your personal attack" and "it's up to the user to block someone" leave in my opinion a bit too much wiggle room, and I learned that the hard way. 😕

I understand why you wouldn't want to add rules that would be too strict or would not leave some interpretation up to the moderator, but would it be possible at least to state in some way that harassing or dog-piling someone is not OK?

 

[Shellaccount]

Voted 1 here cause 'Yes, I believe that the current rules should be more clearly defined and fleshed out so that all loopholes are closed.' Is a good ideal but 'Moderators should take a stronger stance on moderating user conduct.' is kinda meh why put the good ideal and that bit one the same option? When the other options are pretty much keep it the same or give up completely.
Loop-holes are just a bad thing, it's intently going against the the rules as you (the site owners/runners) have decided and trying to then cover your tracks. Sure the whole thing is a bit grey when it comes to unlicensed translations but we the community should not be trying screw with the guys who are letting us read them in a damn fine and convenient place. But of course that my opinion and you all know that saying.